Regional Smart Scale Priority Workshop...Regional Smart Scale Priority Workshop Agenda 6:00 p.m....
Transcript of Regional Smart Scale Priority Workshop...Regional Smart Scale Priority Workshop Agenda 6:00 p.m....
VDOT Fredericksburg District
July 11, 2016
Regional Smart Scale Priority Workshop
Agenda
6:00 p.m. Welcome and Purpose of Meeting – Mr. Paul Agnello, FAMPO Administrator
6:10 p.m. Smart Scale Presentation – Mr. Chad Tucker and Ms. Margie Ray, VDOT
6:40 p.m. FAMPO/GWRC Role in the Smart Scale Process – Mr. Paul Agnello
6:50 p.m. Regional Candidate Statewide High Priority Projects – Mr. Paul Agnello
7:15 p.m. Input from Policy Board Members, Elected Officials and Public
8:00 p.m. Next Steps and Adjourn – Mr. Paul Agnello
2
Purpose of Tonight’s Meeting
1. State staff will provide a presentation on revised Smart Scale (Formerly “HB2”) Program
2. Smart Scale Application Period opens on August 1st. Need to identify Regional Priority projects for Smart Scale in a July timeframe
3. FAMPO and GWRC Action on priority projects to be requested at July 18th meetings
4. Tonight’s Meeting: To discuss candidate projects, answer questions, and gather input to refine priority projects as necessary in advance of July 18th FAMPO and GWRC meetings
3
Candidate Project Development
1. Effort ongoing for several months since last Fall 2. I-95 mainline needs between Mpt 145 and 125 from I-95 Phase 1 Corridor Study 3. TDM efforts with GWRideConnect and FAMPO identifying PNR Lot Needs 4. Transit planning efforts with FRED to identify potential Bus Transit Needs 5. Transit planning efforts with VRE to identify Fredericksburg line needs in FAMPO/GWRC region 6. Planning efforts with City Pathways Steering Committee to identify Bicycle/Pedestrian needs in City of
Fredericksburg
4
Draft Regional Candidate Smart Scale Projects July 11, 2016
5
1. Northbound Rappahannock River Crossing Project ~ $152 Million Option 1: Add 4th Lane NB “Northern Tail” to Exit 136: Centreport Pkwy? ~ $8.5 to $11 Million Option 2: Add 4th Lane NB “Northern Mini-Tail” to just before Truslow Bridge? ~ $3 Million
2. Rte 610 Direct Connect Ramp to 95 Express Lanes ~ $13 to $25 Million 3. New PNR Lot – Route 3 East (Stafford) ~ $7 Million 4. Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Connection from Chatham Bridge to New City Riverfront Park 5. VRE Station Improvements: Brooke & Leeland ~ $13 Million
Add Leeland Station PNR Expansion ~ $5 Million? 6. VRE Fredericksburg Line Capacity Improvements ~ $95 Million 7. Other?
6
I-95 Phase I Study Area
Garrisonville
Stafford
Centreport
US 17
Rte 3
US 1
• Priority Element 1 – Near Term Planned and programmed improvements
‒ Express Lane Southern Tail project ‒ Additional southbound 4th lane from Garrisonville Road to Courthouse Road ‒ Reconstruct Courthouse Road interchange to improve operations ‒ Southbound Rappahannock River Crossing CD-Lane project ‒ Safety improvements at Route 3 interchange
• Priority Element 2 – Northbound Rappahannock River Crossing project
‒ Additional northbound 4th lane from US 17 to Centreport Parkway ‒ Northbound CD-lanes from Route 3 to US 17 ‒ Directional flyover ramp from eastbound Route 3 to northbound I-95
• Priority Element 3 – Express lanes extension south to US 17
‒ Direct connect ramp form Garrisonville Road to express lanes to / from north ‒ Two reversible express lanes in median
• Priority Element 4 – Improvements between Route 3 & US 1 interchanges
‒ New interstate access point at Harrison Road ‒ General purpose widening (4th lane) in select locations along I-95
7
I-95 Phase 1 Corridor Study Preferred Alternative Priorities
143
140
136
133
130
Garrisonville Rd
Courthouse Rd
Centreport Pkwy
17
Central Park area
3
I-95 NEEDS STUDY
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
126 EXIT
N 06/02/16
Harrison Rd
Includes all No-Build assumptions 8
1
95
Courthouse Rd
17
Each line represents a single lane of travel. No-Build infrastructure elements shown in black. Alternative elements shown in red. Intended to show lane balance and allowed movements. Not to scale.
Not to scale
Alternative 7c11 Draft Preferred Master Plan Alternative
I-95 Needs Study DRAFT Preferred Alternative
Rest Area access detail not shown
Potential “Northern Tail” to NB Rappahannock River Crossing Project: 4th NB Lane from Rte 17 to/towards Centreport Pkwy
1. NB Rappahannock River Crossing Project
9
1. Conceptual layout of Northbound Rappahannock Crossing Project
I-95 NEEDS STUDY Alternative 7c11
Potential “Northern Tail” 4th NB Lane continuing north from GP/CD Lane Merge at Rte 17
143
140
136
133
130
Garrisonville Rd
Courthouse Rd
Centreport Pkwy
17
Central Park area
3
I-95 NEEDS STUDY
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
126 EXIT
N 06/02/16
Harrison Rd
Includes all No-Build assumptions 10
1
95
Courthouse Rd
17
Each line represents a single lane of travel. No-Build infrastructure elements shown in black. Alternative elements shown in red. Intended to show lane balance and allowed movements. Not to scale.
Not to scale
Alternative 7c11 Draft Preferred Master Plan Alternative
I-95 Needs Study DRAFT Preferred Alternative
Rest Area access detail not shown
Potential Direct Connection Ramp at Garrisonville from Rte 610 to 95 Express Lanes
2. Rte 610 Direct Connect Ramp to 95 Express Lanes
11
I-95 NEEDS STUDY Alternative 7c11
Conceptual layouts of Express Lanes connection at Route 610
Option 1
Not to Scale Conceptual drawings for planning level discussions only
12
I-95 NEEDS STUDY Alternative 7c11
Conceptual layouts of Express Lanes connection at Route 610
Option 2
Not to Scale Conceptual drawings for planning level discussions only
13
Rte 3 (East) PNR Lot 1. Documented Need in 2011 FAMPO PNR Lot Study 2. GWRC currently leasing 105 spaces because no PNR lot
exists
3. Primary Need to serve Dahlgren Commuters 4. FHWA has indicated FAMPO/GWRC need to work toward
developing a permanent lot solution
Dahlgren Commuters from FAMPO Area
14
15
3. New PNR Lot – Route 3 East (Stafford) : Option 1
16
3. New PNR Lot – Route 3 East (Stafford) : Option 2
17
4. Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Connection from Chatham Bridge to New City Riverfront Park
18
5. VRE Station Improvements: Brooke & Leeland
To Provide: 1. Second Platform 2. Extension of Existing Platform 3. Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements Total Cost ~ $13 Million
Leeland Station Brooke Station
Note: Pending VRE TIGER Request for $3.6 Million of Funding Needed TIGER Award Selections expected in September, 2016
Brooke Station Improvements: New Second Platform (From TIGER Application)
• Add 650-foot second platform (CSXT-VRE MOU requirement)
• Add pedestrian and bicycle improvements
• Does not include improvements to existing platform
• Estimated Costs: Bike/Ped $80,000 Platform Design $770,000 Construction $6,000,000 Total $6,850,000 Rounded $7,000,000
• Programmed Funding: REF $7,000,000
ALTERNATIVE 1 (RECOMMENDED)
ALTERNATIVE 2 (NOT RECOMMENDED)
Leeland Station Improvements: New Second Platform (From TIGER Application)
• Add 650-foot second platform (CSXT-VRE MOU requirement)
• Add pedestrian and bicycle improvements • Does not include improvements to existing platform
Estimated Costs: Bike/Ped $80,000 Platform Design $750,000 Construction $10,950,000 Total $11,780,000 Rounded $12,000,000
• Programmed Funding: REF $8,400,000
• TIGER Request $3,600,000
ALTERNATIVE 1 (NOT RECOMMENDED)
ALTERNATIVE 2 (RECOMMENDED)
21
5. VRE Station Improvements: Leeland Station Bike/Ped Improvements
To provide better Bike/Ped Connectivity to Leeland Station Neighborhood
22
5. VRE Station Improvements: Brooke & Leeland – Leeland Station Parking Expansion Option
Current Lot = 847 Spaces is near capacity Surplus Gravel Lot = 150 Spaces is generally about 25% full, and is planned for development Expansion would use 3 acres owned by Stafford and provide about 225 additional spaces for about $5 Million
Next Steps
July 11th – July 18th: Consensus on Regional Smart Scale Priorities July 18th: Planned FAMPO and GWRC Action Requested for Regional Smart Scale Project Priorities for FAMPO, GWRC, and PRTC July 19th – August 15th: Application Development August 16th – September 30th: Application Submittal September 19th – Planned FAMPO and GWRC Action Requested for Locality projects requiring Regional Resolutions of Support
23
Input from Policy Board Members, Elected Officials, and Public
24